You are not logged in.
My everyday user with an uid / gid of 1000 is unable to use any ports from 1-65535. creating a user with the name asd and uid/gid for 1001 with the same groups (wheel kvm scanner input plugdev docker sambashare) as the previous user plus group 1000(gid), is able to open the port.
This is not a routing issue. i can see for example transmission-qt creating upnp/ nat-pmp rules and with user asd everything works.
I am not running any firewalls except iptables / core packages group. I use networkmanager with kde plasma on linux-zen, which should not matter as the other user works.
I have already wasted 4 hours messing with my double nat that already worked (modem + openwrt).
This is stupid, please help
Offline
No normal user can open ports < 1024
strace nc -vlp 2000 > ~/netcat.strace 2>&1
Offline
I am not running any firewalls except iptables
Post the output of `iptables-save`
Are you familiar with our Forum Rules, and How To Ask Questions The Smart Way?
BlueHackers // fscanary // resticctl
Offline
No normal user can open ports < 1024
strace nc -vlp 2000 > ~/netcat.strace 2>&1
is unable to use any ports from 1-65535
iptables-save
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.2 on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
*mangle
:PREROUTING ACCEPT [7544:4738964]
:INPUT ACCEPT [1997:973301]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [5469:3748000]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [1620:195972]
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [7208:3962764]
-A POSTROUTING -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j CHECKSUM --checksum-fill
COMMIT
# Completed on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.2 on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
*nat
:PREROUTING ACCEPT [135:22921]
:INPUT ACCEPT [38:6836]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [333:26648]
:POSTROUTING ACCEPT [317:24732]
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 224.0.0.0/24 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 -d 255.255.255.255/32 -j RETURN
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p tcp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -p udp -j MASQUERADE --to-ports 1024-65535
-A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.122.0/24 ! -d 192.168.122.0/24 -j MASQUERADE
COMMIT
# Completed on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
# Generated by iptables-save v1.6.2 on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
*filter
:INPUT ACCEPT [1970:970642]
:FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0]
:OUTPUT ACCEPT [1617:194976]
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A INPUT -i virbr0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -d 192.168.122.0/24 -o virbr0 -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -s 192.168.122.0/24 -i virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -o virbr0 -j ACCEPT
-A FORWARD -o virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A FORWARD -i virbr0 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-port-unreachable
-A OUTPUT -o virbr0 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j ACCEPT
COMMIT
# Completed on Wed Oct 3 08:51:40 2018
Offline
That was a general remark because you even tried…
Therefore the nc strace shall be for a port you can legitimately open (eg. 2000)
There seems no owner match in iptables at all.
Offline
..... if i start netcat on 2000 and use something like
upnpc -a myip 63697 63697 TCP
the port can be reached from wan and the nc command exits successfully.
if i give transmission-qt (or qbittorrent) the same port, the port is reported closed....
Last edited by nicman23 (2018-10-03 06:12:16)
Offline
Tried "just transmission"?
(It opens a webserver on 9091 and iirc you can use the config gui there to set the peer port (randomness))
Offline
non gui transmission from the same user works...... but if the issue was with transmission-qt, qbittorrent should also be working..
Offline
the plot thickness, i rm -rf `ed the transmission configuration that all is working/ except magnets.
so basically i got double teamed by qbittorrent and transmission-qt
Offline